Presidential hopeful Heather Humphreys acknowledged she regrets some decisions made by the Government during the Covid-19 crisis.
At the conclusion of the final presidential debate before polling day on Friday, both candidates were asked if they held any regrets from their careers, reports The Mirror.
Ms Humphreys reflected on her time as a minister during the pandemic, expressing sorrow over families being unable to properly say goodbye to dying loved ones.
She said: “That stays with me. When a loved one is dying and you can’t hold their hand, I think we could have found a way around that. It’s not easy for the families that looked at their loved ones dying through a window,” reports The Mirror.
Ms Connolly agreed that the situation was deeply upsetting, though she acknowledged she supported the restrictions due to the intense fear surrounding the pandemic.
She added: “I agree with Heather except it was Government policy. My personal regret is that I agreed with the restrictions in the first instance,” reports The Mirror.
Elsewhere in the debate, the two candidates had several sharp exchanges. A key flashpoint involved Ms Connolly’s past work as a barrister.
She pushed back against claims she had dodged questions about handling repossession cases, insisting she had in fact addressed the issue, reports The Mirror.
When host Ms McInerney challenged her again, Connolly stated she had represented credit institutions but refused to name them.
Ms Humphreys then pressed her opponent to clarify her involvement in home repossession cases.
The Fine Gael candidate said: “She said the banks were criminals so Catherine needs to explain to people why on one hand she was working for banks to repossess homes but on another case standing up as a councillor and condemning it,” reports The Mirror.
Connolly firmly responded that barristers cannot choose their cases, and reiterated that she had not tried to conceal her past work.
Questioned further by Ms Humphreys on her past answers, Connolly said: “I absolutely said yes I represented credit institutions,” reports The Mirror.
Ms Humphreys denied that her party’s video targeting Connolly was a smear campaign, even after it faced criticism online.
She said: “It is not a smear campaign. We have seen all the nasty things that have gone up on social media in relation to me and my family. People from the far left are putting this stuff on social media. There are a lot of people out there saying horrible things about me and my family and my traditions,” reports The Mirror.
She added that Ms Connolly should have admitted her past work “two weeks ago or three weeks ago.” Connolly replied: “I answered it and said I couldn’t go into details of who I represented. I carried out each role to the best of my ability. It’s very low,” reports The Mirror.
The conversation then shifted to each candidate’s stance on the European Union. Humphreys reaffirmed her support for the EU and was questioned about any prior criticisms.
She said Europe should have responded faster to the situation in Gaza, reports The Mirror.
When asked for an example of when she had criticised the EU, Humphreys struggled to provide a specific case.
Pressed again, she said: “I have spoken up,” reports The Mirror.
On what exactly, she added that there were various issues she had concerns about. When asked to give just one, she replied: “I don’t accept everything,” reports The Mirror.
Humphreys was also challenged on whether she believes the United States played a role in enabling the genocide in Gaza.
She responded vaguely, saying: “We have spoke to our neighbours, the US,” reports The Mirror.
As she expressed emotion while discussing the topic, she stopped short of saying whether the US had directly enabled the conflict.
Attention turned to Ms Connolly, who was asked whether she would directly tell Donald Trump that the US enabled the genocide in Gaza.
She replied: “As a president I will meet anyone that the Government invites into the country. The genocide was enabled and resourced by American money,” reports The Mirror.
However, when asked directly if she would say that to Trump, she refused to give a definitive yes or no.
She added: “In relation to my role as president it depends how I am meeting him and what the subject is,” reports The Mirror.
Pressed further, she said: “It is a speculative question, it depends what is on the agenda for the meeting. If the discussion is genocide that is a completely different thing.” She said that she doubts genocide would be on the agenda if President Trump came to Ireland.”
Ms Connolly added: “I would have no difficulty in my role with meeting people,” reports The Mirror.
In the final segment of the debate, both candidates were asked to defend their personal judgment.
Ms Humphreys was questioned over her handling of the Shane O’Farrell case, while Connolly faced scrutiny for a past trip to Syria, reports The Mirror.
Ms Humphreys offered an apology to the O’Farrell family. The 23-year-old law student was struck and killed in 2011 by a man who, at the time, should have been incarcerated.
Tell us your thoughts in the Facebook post and share this with your friends.
